Calcutta High Court
WPA/24189/2024 of DIPAK KUMAR KANDAR Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 17 August 2026
Court No.24 pg. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 24189 of 2024 Dipak Kumar Kandar -versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Radhashyam Maiti Mr. Manoranjan Jana … For the petitioner Ms. Tapasi Palit Sinha Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay
17.08.2026
Court No.24
pg.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 24189 of 2024
Dipak Kumar Kandar
-versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Radhashyam Maiti
Mr. Manoranjan Jana
… For the petitioner
Ms. Tapasi Palit Sinha
Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay
… For the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), South 24-Parganas in disallowing the petitioner’s prayer for two additional increments for acquiring Ph.D qualification. Such prayer has been rejected relying on the School Education Department’s (Sec. Br.) memo no.2062-School Education (Sec) dated 9th November, 2001.
2. The cut-off date for acquiring higher qualification has been fixed on 18th August, 2005. As the petitioner obtained his Ph.D degree after the cut-off date on 1st June, 2006, accordingly, he was held to be not entitled to the additional increments as prayed for.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that it was inappropriate for the authority to fix a cut- off date for grant of incremental benefit.
4. In support of such submission that the cut- off date could not have been fixed for grant of incremental benefit to teacher who acquired Ph.D degree at a later date, learned advocate for the petitioner relies on the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Dr. Uday Shankar Chakrabarty v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in (2013) 1 CAL LT 352 (HC) wherein the Court specifically directed that the teacher would be entitled to enjoy the benefit of two increments on acquiring Ph.D degree even though convocation was held for conferring the degree after 18th August, 2005.
5. As it appears that the issue in question has already been decided by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, accordingly, the decision of the District Inspector of Schools not to allow two additional increments for acquiring Ph.D degree after 18th August, 2005 is liable to be set aside and is, accordingly, set aside.
6. The District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), South 24-Parganas is directed to grant two additional increments to the petitioner strictly in line with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the matter of Dr. Uday Shankar Chakrabarty (supra).
7. Steps shall be taken in the matter at the earliest but positively within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order.
8. Learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to forward a copy of the judgment passed in the matter of Dr. Uday Shankar Chakrabarty (supra) to the aforesaid respondent at the time of communicating the order of the Court.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of.
10. All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
11. Certified server copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)